Riding High: Arizona's Zero-Tolerance Stance on Pot and Driving

A couple of large mason jars full of green buds sit on the coffee table inside Tad Zaccard's west Mesa mobile home as he talks about his marijuana-DUI ticket.

"I'm a grower," admits Zaccard, a 46-year-old nutrition adviser who works for a local hospital.

As one of the state's 38,000 qualified patients, he's growing cannabis legally under Arizona's 2010 medical-marijuana law. He gets high on his own supply.

Jamie Peachey

Tad Zaccard of Mesa worries he'll be convicted of DUI after a December traffic stop simply because he uses medical pot.

But Zaccard insists that he wasn't impaired by pot in any way when he was pulled over on the night of December 29 by a Gilbert cop working a DUI task-force patrol.

The living room of Zaccard's home is tiny, but neat. A connecting room contains thousands of vinyl records, which Zaccard spins for the classic-rock Internet radio station he operates just for fun, www.waxtraxradio.com.

On this Sunday afternoon in mid-April, Zaccard — a young grandpa who's half-Italian, half-Native American — is dressed in shorts and a black T-shirt accented with a heavy gold chain.

There's no smell of burned marijuana in the place. Zaccard seems as sober as a preacher. In his soft-spoken way, he's as full of righteousness as one, too. He's well-versed on the subject of Arizona's zero-tolerance law on driving with marijuana in the bloodstream, and he's aware that the state Supreme Court has been asked to review the law.

"I think the whole thing's criminal," he says of his arrest. "How many people does this have to happen to? I believe in this cause, and I think this needs to be addressed. It's really not right."

He relates how he was stopped just after 11 p.m. on a holiday-season Saturday night, having just finished dinner with his two adult children. Before going to bed, the unseasonably cold weather had spurred him to head out to a nearby Walgreens to buy a space heater.

Seconds after pulling out of the mobile-home park onto Main Street in his black Pontiac Sunfire, he saw the blue and red flashing lights in the rearview mirror.

Officer Eric Riley, traveling east on his motorcycle, stopped Zaccard for making a slow lane change. Zaccard disputes details of Riley's police report. He insists that he wasn't "straddling" the line between Main Street's eastbound lanes for 500 feet as he moved from the right to the left lane.

After making the stop, the cop thought the driver's speech and body movements seemed slow, his report shows. Zaccard had "extremely dilated pupils and red and watery eyes," plus a "white/green coating on his tongue," leading Riley to believe Zaccard was stoned, the report states.

A breath test showed a blood-alcohol content of zero.

Riley asked him when he'd last smoked marijuana. Zaccard told him he'd smoked one joint the day before.

Admissions like that are golden to certified drug-recognition experts, like Riley, who know that traces of marijuana can stay in the bloodstream for days or weeks.

Zaccard made a few key errors on a field-sobriety test. He couldn't walk heel-to-toe in a straight line and had trouble following instructions, Riley's report states. On the "one-leg stand" test, Zaccard "hopped" and seemed to have balance problems.

Soon enough, the Sunfire was towed, Zaccard's blood was drawn, and he was sent home with a citation.

Zaccard hadn't received a court summons, meaning the Gilbert prosecutor's office hadn't yet decided to move forward with a DUI case. His blood-test results weren't available as of press time.

Yet the prosecution, in theory, probably has an airtight case. Zaccard is a regular user of marijuana. So it's all but certain he'll fail the blood test. His medical-marijuana card won't help him if Gilbert presses the case, because of the technicality that doctors recommend, but not prescribe, marijuana.

Even if a person admits to smoking a little pot before driving, it's still reasonable to ask whether his or her level of impairment is comparable to a .08 BAC, the point at which a driver is considered legally drunk.

It doesn't matter under Arizona's zero-tolerance law. Technically speaking, Zaccard and everyone else with the slightest hint of pot residue in their blood — even card-holding patients — commit a legal foul every time they get behind the wheel.

Arizona is one of 15 states that has a zero-tolerance law against driving with any amount of pot in the system.

But, in keeping with the state's oddball reputation, Arizona is one of only three states that have both a zero-tolerance driving law for pot and a law legalizing the sale, possession, and use of medical marijuana.

Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery — a Republican who's allied with Sheriff Joe Arpaio and is fighting to keep the drug-DUI law as is — stated during a radio show earlier this year that pot users are never legally able to drive in Arizona.

Montgomery believes that since there's no good way to determine impairment from marijuana, it's best to go the easy route — require a simple blood test that leads to lots of convictions. This gives the prosecutor's office a political boost with those who share his prohibitionist view. The right-wing county attorney has taken up the fight against the voter-approved 2010 Medical Marijuana Act where Governor Jan Brewer and state Attorney General Tom Horne, both fellow Republicans, have left off.

This law is really messed up. I got a sober DUI last week. I have a medical card. I just got done walking my dog for 1.5 miles, running about 3 and hitting the gym. Then I showered and got behind the wheel. No way was I impaired. I wasn't high, buzzed or anything. I've been toking for decades, every day. So my blood is gonna be positive. I was an idiot who agreed to the FST because here I am stone-cold sober, thinking I'll just show them I'm sober. F'n BS law.

Yep its another bullshit pot law. The truth is they have no way to know when the last time you smoked was or if you are impaired. They can only pull blood which could show a joint smoked two weeks ago. Its not the same as alcohol and shouldnt be treated the same way with testing. I feel bad for anyone dealing with these totally unjust laws. For fucks sake its a plant, im not hurting anymore, so just leave us the fuck alone.

Cannabis can be planted outdoors under the Sun, either on natural soil
or in pots of pre-made or commercial soil. Of course some strains are
better than others for outdoor cultivation. One strain is not the same
as the other and some is just more suitable for your garden than others.
This can of course depend on different conditions, variables and
aspects. Outdoor marijuana strains, like most other strains, can be
bought basically anywhere and there are hundreds of different cannabis
strains that are bred for outdoor growing, or at least claimed to be so.
A lot of these outdoor cannabis seeds are simply copies of other
already existing strains or seeds and have just been given a different
name or a nice and interesting sounding description.

this same exact thing has happend to me. I had smoked a joint a day before getting pulled over and just like the report says if a "D.R.E." officer pulls you over and they can prove you have any type of metabolite in your system then your basically screwed. I have had to pay THOUSANDS of dollars to the state of Arizona for getting a DUI plus since I am a MMJ patient they couldnt charge me with any marijuana related crimes so after charging me with not only a DUI i was required to take Substance abuse classes and a MADD (mothers against DRUNK driving) course. Also what the report doesnt mention is that in AZ once you are charged with any type of DUI you are required to have a Breathalyzer installed in your vehicle for a YEAR! (average 100$/ month) AZ is a police state and anyone that says otherwise needs to get their heads checked.

My nephew, who is not a patient, is still going to be convicted of a dui for pot, even though he was sober. He was involved in an accident on his way home from school that was not his fault. He was sober, but had smoked a joint two days before to celebrate a new job. After the accident, the police determined he was impaired "to the slighest degree" pupils slightly dialated, and had trouble with field test. (later, the blood results showed he was completely sober, and had only trace cannibinoids in his blood, showing he was telling the truth) . His "impairment" was caused by getting punched in the face with an airbag after getting in his first accident, and he was frazzled. He was offered no medical assistance, and was instead arrested, despite the accident being the other drivers fault.

Our laws definately need to be reformed. His life will be altered forever, and he is a good kid, didn't even do the crime he will be convicted of. AZ sucks!

The California Supreme Court ruled Monday that cities and counties can ban medical marijuana dispensaries, a decision likely to further diminish the network of storefront pot shops.

In a unanimous opinion, the court held that California’s medical marijuana laws — the nation’s first and most liberal — neither prevent local governments from using their land-use powers to zone dispensaries out of existence nor grant authorized users convenient access to the drug.

The ruling came in a legal challenge to a ban enacted by the city of Riverside in 2010, but 200 other jurisdictions have similar prohibitions on retail pot sales, the advocacy group Americans for Safe Access estimates.

Of the 18 states that allow the medical use of marijuana, California is the only one where residents can obtain a doctor’s recommendation to consume it for any ailment the physician sees fit as opposed to only for conditions such as AIDS and glaucoma.

What is the deal with this County Attourney. Does he not have access to any scientific studies or is it he just hates anyone who isn't like him. I wonder if he keeps some pain pills around for you know when he might need them. I have never seen anyone who acts so intense unless they are covering something up about themselves. Makes you wonder!

You are quoting a 'study' (and I use that term very loosely here) done by a TV station, that is NOT scientifically done, has no idea whatever else the participant was on (they only checked for MJ prior to the test, nothing else), was not done in a controlled manner, was done with a very small test group (only 3 people) and only 1 "expert" that we do not know they qualifications as your source????

ROFLMFAO!!!!!! What an idiot - come back to me when it's an ACTUAL test and not a show being put on to get people to watch their 'news' station.

As I have said, I do not advocate anyone driving inebriated on anything, but c'mon, citing this as an actual test with real world scientific and accurate results is just stupid.

Come back to me with an actual test correctly done and we'll talk, until then, I will stick with the real studies done on an actual representative test group, done by scientists and LEO's who know how to do a proper study instead of this propaganda.

Of course but drink yourself into a stuper & you can drive the next morning...by law. Oh & lets let all elelderly drive w/o regular or more frequent driving tests regardless of the meds they may be on or disability same a half

It is typical of right wing dingbats and pretentious politicos like Bill Montgomery, who incessantly bemoan the Feds impinging on State powers. Yet, these same two-faced political whores want to take over control of federal immigration law. While, in the same breath they fight to overthrow the will of State voters , who have thrice voted to allow access to medical marijuana. State's right's my ass you dictatorial dicks

" certified drug-recognition experts" You must mean cops that profile people and besides people that are drunk drive like there is no tomorrow and care free step on the gas. A stoned person will drive way more cautious slow and concentrate on driving.

Sounds like they knew that Zaccard and targeted him. Come on Cops your breaking the law pulling people over for no reason! and lying that Zaccard was impared.

I've heard the cops will pull so s BS about your toungesppearing green.I can tell you one could sit down and smoke up a 1/4 oz or eat a dozen highly medicated cookies and your toungesppearing is not going to turn green.the simple fact that the cops lie and this lie can be proven should have this tossed as a cop looking to make a bust regardless of the actual state the person is in.smoking cannabis does not, nor does eating cannabis nor has it ever made one's tongue appear green.

Persecuting sick folks because of trace amounts of THC?! Why did voters even bother passing this law? All it does is give MontyPug (who kept Peter Spaw on taxpayers teat despite confessing to Constitutional violations and abuse of power) a license to put people in jail.

This nonsense (convicting people driving while impaired by marijuana when they are very obviously not impaired by marijuana) is possible only because of the utter neutering of the Grand Jury. This institution (enshrined in our 5th Amendment) came to us from England. It's purpose was to protect Englishmen from a King's ability to charge people for no good reason. It was a screen between accusation and indictment.

Here in Arizona in the 21st century we have the perfect example of the need for this institution. But it hardly exists. The only people on a Grand Jury are those who can take significant time away from work and family obligations for essentially no pay for a period of four months. This is a select group who tend to be older, less emphatic and less informed.

And then, let not any member of the Grand Jury express any doubt about interpretation of law, the process, nor anything detrimental to the prosecutor. Removal is always an option for the powers that be.

Only a majority vote is required for indictment. Neither the accused nor his attorney have any right to appear, and almost never is that rule waived. No contrary or conflicting evidence is ever presented, except by accident. The Grand Jury knows nothing but what they are permitted to hear by the prosecutor.

One consequence of the neutering of the Grand Jury is that prosecutors like Bill Montgomery are able to promote these types of obvious injustice.

You have the right to remain silent, use that right and stop thinking you are obligated in ANY way to tell a cop that you smoked pot, are or are not sober, did or did not have a drink, etc. You have the right to NOT take a field sobriety test and only a fool takes a field sobriety test. It is NOT a test that will be used to prove you are sober but is a test used to collect evidence, usually subjective evidence, that you are impaired.

Once you have admitted to having had a drink or smoked pot you have given the cop probable cause to draw your blood.

Shut up and your chances of staying out of jail are a lot better.

As for morons like Montgomery, if it is difficult to prove someone is impaired due to pot that does not mean the burden of proof should be dropped to nothing, if you can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that someone is impaired on pot then you have no business arresting and prosecuting them.

If the Arizona Supreme Court doesn't see this as an end run around the medical pot law, it is time for another voter initiative.